"Flagstaff"

Named for its long and skinny fuselage. There's a story behind that, reference the trivia at the bottom of the description.

Continuing the line

of "MuG" aircraft is the MuG-4. I will not lie to you, you'll probably be disappointed. The MuG-4 was dreaded, not by foes, but by its pilots due to its sub-par performance. The MuG-4 couldn't turn well, it couldn't climb well, its armor was so-so, but worst of all its engine was underpowered to the point that the MV-1 looked like it was supercharged. The MuG-4's sole redeeming factor was its heavy armament, boasting two 20mms, two 37mms, and a maximum payload of 10 rockets (although the given configuration has 6 rockets and 2 drop tanks). As such, the MuG-4 was nicknamed "lucky" (more accurately "?????????" since the MuG is Russian) by its pilots, since you would have to be lucky or unhumanly skilled to shoot down anything in this plane.

Trivia

-The MuG-4 was mostly considered a bad plane due to its era. Truth was it could dominate virtually any WWII plane, which is fairly impressive considering the MuG-4 was built in 1948, but the MuG-4 quickly becomes a let-down when you consider that at the same time there were fighters like the early F9R Tango, Archers, MV-1, MuG-2, or A2R5.
-America knew of the MuG-4 early on due to reconnaissance. However, they knew of it so early on that they actually found not the real MuG-4, but the original prototype, which was even thinner and longer in an attempt to make a "superdynamic" fuselage. The prototype failed and nearly crashed in a test flight, but survived was later revised into the MuG-4 that exists now.
-MuG aircraft, for whatever reason, seemed to be much harder for defectors to get their hands on than other Russian aircraft at the time, but MuG-4s were apparently left out by intention in hopes that some defector would take them. Turns out this actually did the opposite, as many smart enough to be effective thieves were sure it was a trap. It wasn't.